Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"W5DXP" wrote in message ... David Robbins wrote: btw, for whom ever has it... i am still waiting to see the derivation of the conjugate rho formula. i published one on here for the 'classical' version, where is the other one??? It exists in the Kurokawa paper, "Power Waves and the Scattering Matrix". He defines a new kind of wave, different from traveling waves, and calls them "Power Waves". That conjugate term is apparently the result of this new definition of waves. He says, "... when the main interest is in the relation between various circuits in which the sources are uncorrelated, the traveling waves are not considered as the best independent variables to use for the analysis." Seems he is not talking about a system where all the waves are coherent and has defined a new concept of a "Power Wave" which includes an alternate definition of a reflection coefficient which includes a conjugate term. -- 73, Cecil, W5DXP is that paper on the web somewhere?? i figured it had to be something with computing powers that was getting mixed in here some how, i think that is the only place you can end up with conjugates in transmission lines. so i assume its not a simple 1 page derivation from basic root principles, it must take a whole new language to express it. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
David Robbins wrote:
is that paper on the web somewhere?? Perhaps someone will offer it to you as a .pdf file. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
is that paper on the web somewhere?? i figured it had to be something
with computing powers that was getting mixed in here some how, i think that is the only place you can end up with conjugates in transmission lines. so i assume its not a simple 1 page derivation from basic root principles, it must take a whole new language to express it. ===================================== Yeah ! Trouble is nobody has yet dug up the ancient stone on which the language is carved and translated. There are too many unjustified * 's to make any sense out of thse recently discovered hieroglyphics. I am reminded of my old dear maths master, Mr Stevens. God had blessed him. He was a rare survivor of the machine gun bullets, shrapnel, flame-throwers, and chlorine-gas breathed in without a gas mask while hanging on the barbed wire in no-man's land between the trenches, Shell-fire-Corner, Ypres, Belgium, 1917. He spoke in a hoarse whisper and I always sat in the front row of desks in his classes so I could better hear him. He kept people awake at the back of the class by throwing missiles - sticks of chalk of which he was amply stocked. He referred to Factorial(x) = x! = x Exclamation mark, as "x By Jove" and so endowed on me a lifelong love of the beauty of mathematics. He also taught History in similar vein. --- Reg. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Calculus not needed (was: Reflection Coefficient Smoke Clears a Bit) | Antenna | |||
A Subtle Detail of Reflection Coefficients (but important to know) | Antenna | |||
Reflection Coefficient Smoke Clears a Bit | Antenna | |||
Mother Nature's reflection coefficient... | Antenna |